Search (112 results, page 6 of 6)

9.835698E-5 = product of:
  0.0037375651 = sum of:
    0.0037375651 = product of:
      0.011212695 = sum of:
        0.011212695 = weight(_text_:22 in 3070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011212695 = score(doc=3070,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057961546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3070, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3070)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

9.835698E-5 = product of:
  0.0037375651 = sum of:
    0.0037375651 = product of:
      0.011212695 = sum of:
        0.011212695 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011212695 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057961546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4573, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4573)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Date

9.12.2018 16:22:25

9.835698E-5 = product of:
  0.0037375651 = sum of:
    0.0037375651 = product of:
      0.011212695 = sum of:
        0.011212695 = weight(_text_:22 in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011212695 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057961546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4641, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4641)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Date

21.12.2018 17:22:13

8.859915E-5 = product of:
  0.0033667674 = sum of:
    0.0033667674 = product of:
      0.006733535 = sum of:
        0.006733535 = weight(_text_:4 in 2515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006733535 = score(doc=2515,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.044916563 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 2515, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2515)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Source

Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch

8.859915E-5 = product of:
  0.0033667674 = sum of:
    0.0033667674 = product of:
      0.006733535 = sum of:
        0.006733535 = weight(_text_:4 in 3032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006733535 = score(doc=3032,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.044916563 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 3032, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3032)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Abstract

This article aims to stimulate research on business process oriented knowledge infrastructures by pointing to the power of visualizations. It claims that business process oriented knowledge infrastructure research is stuck and therefore needs to reinvent and revitalize itself with new impulses. One such stimulus is the use of visualization techniques in business process oriented knowledge infrastructures, with the aim to improve knowledge transfer, knowledge communication, and knowledge creation. First, this article presents an overview on related visualization research. Second, it proposes the Knowledge Visualization Framework as a theoretical backbone where business process oriented knowledge infrastructure research can anchor itself. The framework points to the key questions that need to be answered when visual methods are used in business process oriented knowledge infrastructures. Finally, the article compares the Tube Map Visualization with the Gantt Chart, and proves that the new format excels the traditional approach in regards to various tasks. The findings from the evaluation of 44 interviews indicates that the Project Tube Map is more effective for (1) drawing attention and keeping interest, (2) presenting overview and detail, (3) visualizing who is collaborating with whom, (4) motivating people to participate in the project, and (5) increasing recall. The results presented in this paper are important for researchers and practitioners in the fields of Knowledge Management, Knowledge Visualization, Project Management, and Visual Communication Sciences.

8.859915E-5 = product of:
  0.0033667674 = sum of:
    0.0033667674 = product of:
      0.006733535 = sum of:
        0.006733535 = weight(_text_:4 in 3285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006733535 = score(doc=3285,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.044916563 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 3285, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3285)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Date

4. 2.2010 19:24:06

8.859915E-5 = product of:
  0.0033667674 = sum of:
    0.0033667674 = product of:
      0.006733535 = sum of:
        0.006733535 = weight(_text_:4 in 3917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006733535 = score(doc=3917,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.044916563 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 3917, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3917)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Abstract

Many successful digital interfaces employ visual metaphors to convey features or data properties to users, but the characteristics that make a visual metaphor effective are not well understood. We used a theoretical conception of metaphor from cognitive linguistics to design an interactive system for viewing the citation network of the corpora of literature in the JSTOR database, a highly connected compound graph of 2 million papers linked by 8 million citations. We created 4 variants of this system, manipulating 2 distinct properties of metaphor. We conducted a between-subjects experimental study with 80 participants to compare understanding and engagement when working with each version. We found that building on known image schemas improved response time on look-up tasks, while contextual detail predicted increases in persistence and the number of inferences drawn from the data. Schema-congruency combined with contextual detail produced the highest gains in comprehension. These findings provide concrete mechanisms by which designers presenting large data sets through metaphorical interfaces may improve their effectiveness and appeal with users.

8.859915E-5 = product of:
  0.0033667674 = sum of:
    0.0033667674 = product of:
      0.006733535 = sum of:
        0.006733535 = weight(_text_:4 in 5454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006733535 = score(doc=5454,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.044916563 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 5454, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5454)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Abstract

This research takes the academic articles in the Web of Science's core collection database as a corpus to draw a series of knowledge maps, to explore the relationships, connectivity, dis-tribution, and evolution among their keywords with respect to smart cities in the last decade. Beyond just drawing a text cloud or measuring their sizes, we further explore their texture by iden-tifying the hottest keywords in academic articles, construct links between and among them that share common keywords, identify islands, rocks, reefs that are formed by connected articles-a metaphor inspired by Ong et al. (2005)-and analyze trends in their evolution. We found the following phenomena: 1) "Internet of Things" is the most frequently mentioned keyword in recent research articles; 2) the numbers of islands and reefs are increas-ing; 3) the evolutions of the numbers of weighted links have frac-tal-like structure; and, 4) the coverage of the largest rock, formed by articles that share a common keyword, in the largest island is converging into around 10% to 20%. These phenomena imply that a common interest in the technology of smart cities has been emerging among researchers. However, the administrative, social, economic, and cultural issues need more attention in academia in the future.

7.8685574E-5 = product of:
  0.0029900519 = sum of:
    0.0029900519 = product of:
      0.008970155 = sum of:
        0.008970155 = weight(_text_:22 in 2659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008970155 = score(doc=2659,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057961546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2659, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2659)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

7.0879316E-5 = product of:
  0.002693414 = sum of:
    0.002693414 = product of:
      0.005386828 = sum of:
        0.005386828 = weight(_text_:4 in 1451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005386828 = score(doc=1451,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.044916563 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.11992966 = fieldWeight in 1451, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1451)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 61(2010) no.4, S. 853-854 (L. Wilkinson)

7.0879316E-5 = product of:
  0.002693414 = sum of:
    0.002693414 = product of:
      0.005386828 = sum of:
        0.005386828 = weight(_text_:4 in 2112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005386828 = score(doc=2112,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.044916563 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.11992966 = fieldWeight in 2112, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2112)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Source

Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.4, S.1611-1623

5.9014186E-5 = product of:
  0.002242539 = sum of:
    0.002242539 = product of:
      0.006727617 = sum of:
        0.006727617 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006727617 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057961546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.016551789 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.02631579 = coord(1/38)

Content

As the team describe in a paper posted (http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04951) on arXiv, they found that figures did indeed matter-but not all in the same way. An average paper in PubMed Central has about one diagram for every three pages and gets 1.67 citations. Papers with more diagrams per page and, to a lesser extent, plots per page tended to be more influential (on average, a paper accrued two more citations for every extra diagram per page, and one more for every extra plot per page). By contrast, including photographs and equations seemed to decrease the chances of a paper being cited by others. That agrees with a study from 2012, whose authors counted (by hand) the number of mathematical expressions in over 600 biology papers and found that each additional equation per page reduced the number of citations a paper received by 22%. This does not mean that researchers should rush to include more diagrams in their next paper. Dr Howe has not shown what is behind the effect, which may merely be one of correlation, rather than causation. It could, for example, be that papers with lots of diagrams tend to be those that illustrate new concepts, and thus start a whole new field of inquiry. Such papers will certainly be cited a lot. On the other hand, the presence of equations really might reduce citations. Biologists (as are most of those who write and read the papers in PubMed Central) are notoriously mathsaverse. If that is the case, looking in a physics archive would probably produce a different result.